Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Yum! Brands, Inc.
How Yum! Brands, Inc. stacks up
YUM · against 1,552 other Consumer Cyclical companies
Valuation
35/ 100
Below the middle of the pack.
Ranked #1,003 of 1,553 · scores higher than 35% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score156 peers with a valuation score of 30–39, including YUM · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 35?
Weighted metrics compared with all Consumer Cyclical companies.Mainly because of its EBITDA yield and free cash flow yield, which are weaker than most Consumer Cyclical peers.
- less operating profit (EBITDA) for the company's total value: weaker than 70% of peers. EBITDA yield: 5.1% vs peer median 8.8%
- less free cash flow for the price paid: weaker than 64% of peers. Free cash flow yield: 3.9% vs peer median 6.1%
- Earnings yield is close to the peer norm. Earnings yield: 5.2% vs peer median 4.4%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = YUM, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | YUM | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 1,527 reported | 5.0% | 4.4% | 55% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 1,593 reported | 5.5% | 8.8% | 30% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 594 reported | 3.9% | 6.1% | 36% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 1,536 reported | -16.8% | 57.2% | 2% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around YUM| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 198.5B KRW (≈$143M) | 100 | 73 | |
| 1 | 623.0B KRW (≈$449M) | 100 | 65 | |
| 1 | 382.5B KRW (≈$275M) | 100 | 57 | |
| 1 | 412.0B KRW (≈$297M) | 100 | 56 | |
| 1 | 1.49T KRW (≈$1.1B) | 100 | 73 | |
| 1,003 | 44.1B USD | 35 | 35 | |
| 1,003 |
Scores are sector-relative percentiles from the latest snapshot, always calculated against the whole sector: narrowing the comparison group changes who you compare with, not the scores. Missing metrics are left out and the remaining weights rescaled. How we score